I at a philosophical level believe in the free advancement of learning and many ways to demonstrate that. That means if you get a life experience degree from a school and they deem after review you should get a bachelors its as legitimate as going to a four year college and taking classes getting it that way. Assuming the first is done with some level of analysis and a demonstration of experience. Example I would point to is a person well written as a author why not give them a BA in Creative Writing for published works? The only difference is in the prestige of the institution that is beyond accreditation but in public opinion. Now do I oppose accreditation? If its from any independent source then no I do not. If a public entity does so it should only apply to institutions that they use to hire persons for employment. A state can deny a degree from Unaccredited School AlphaBeta be used for employment but they have no moral right to say anything about that for the private sector. None. A doctor is licensed by the state and they have a right to have a say what schools count or not for training, if its a person in the business realm they have no say. To do anything else violates the first amendment rights to free speech and the right to privacy. Who issued a degree is between the party using the credential and their employer. And if it was in use for personal interest and they want to use the title Doctor in the realm of the private then they have no right to say its not a valid title. But accreditation agencies should be any agency that wishes to do so and let the private sector decide on which ones to give more weight and value. Its not the governments job to protect adults from making bad choices or in determining the seeking of academic credentials after their legal obligation is over- that is up to High School. Do I look at unaccredited schools as equal to accredited schools? Well how am I to judge them? If a person earned a doctorate from a thesis only from an unaccredited school its no different than the same degree from an accredited school or one legal to do so like in England. I for one would see both as equal and let the community of peers decide which is not. Not the government! I point to thousands of years of tradition in learning where a scholar wrote, studied, worked with peers and spent time learning then growing in their stature. Where were degrees handed out in ancient Rome, Athens during the classical age, in the Library of Alexandria by the royalty of Egypt? Where did Plato earn his degree or Sappho or Socrates or Claudius (the emperor of Rome well known as an historian). I oppose boxing and labeling learning at all but if its to be leave it open to all comers and let the market unfettered decide. Why can't a doctor apprentice for 14 years after high school and earning the place as a doctor? Why does it matter how you get from point A to part B as long as the knowledge is there? I say let a person study and earn a degree by any means and again let the free market decide the relative values. If a government at the state level wants to lock in "traditional" schools for medical training then it should e state to state or perhaps Federal. Licensed professions have a different standard. Lets say someone just BUYS a degree- so what! If they are not proven qualified then the market will deal with them. In some cases it might not matter in others it may matter. Can't an employer make value judgements for themselves? Are we to be the parent to everyone just because they are too lazy to do their jobs- including businesses? It matters only to me that licensed professions being under government control can set limits beyond that they should stay out of the matter. To end I have no problems with anyone here. I just take the true position one should learn, get a degree if they want and apply that degree as a credential. Regardless of how they earned that degree. The only matter is a third party does it- unaccredited school, accredited school, academic society or some other means. If twenty people form an academic group to offer a BA in Liberal Arts for doing twenty term papers then so be it. If a person goes to a school and gets a life experience degree fine so be it. If a person goes to Harvard earning a Law Degree then fine so be it. Is that clear enough then, I don't get the problems I believe in learning and academic achievement just not having it dominated by a few Ivory Towers? There was a fine movie JUDE about a stonemason that taught himslef Latin and studied academics and wanted so much to go to the University. Writing a letter he was refused and it broke him. A fine mind not given the recognition of that because of the Ivory Tower that kept out the "unworthy" and looked down on "tradesmen". Its that arrogance I'm opposed to and the wapon I would use is those avenues they challenge why are the academics afraid of the unaccredited schools- let them meet these schools in the free market and let the sword fall. The government is the weapon of the academic Ivory Tower maybe not by directly accrediting the schools but keeping in a system assured to crush free thought and innovation. And any school that dares to tell them to go to hell. If it was in my power ladies and gentleman I'd drive a stake into the system and leave it all to the free market if over the COnstitutional obligations of the states. That is limited to up to High School and public schools- for the others again its not the governments job to protect adults from themselves when they are not harmed. It does no harm if a person spends money on a degree and it turns out a low value degree they are just out money. People lose and waste money on foolish things all the time yet the government doesn't protect them from all their mistakes do they? If they did every Fast Food restaurant would be under governerment limits on selling their fat laden food. Cigarettes would be illegal after all an adult can't read the label or figure smoke in your lungs is bad? Prohibition of alcohol would be back. So I will fight for my position its my right as a free citizen of the United States and protected under the First Amendment and if that offends you that is my right to. I don't think the forum rules do negate supporting the position I hold even if its unpopular I'm for education of any avenue. Distance learning included I just think labeling one way good and another bad just because one school is accredited and another not accredited is by its nature in direct opposition to the Great Tradition of Learning.